NCAA tourney 40-50% of the time is Maryland territory, and they have 60 years of ACC tradition and a recent national title to sell. That's a stretch goal IMO, but there's nothing wrong with those.
I think VT fans overestimate what % of the time other ACC programs make the NCAA's.
Yes, it's a stretch goal, but if I assume that we're consistently in the top half of the ACC, AND IF I ASSUME that the ACC becomes something like it used to be, then in many years close to 1/2 of the league makes the tourney, so if we're top half, well, we should be in 40 to 50%.
Put another way, I thought one trip every 3 years wasn't enough AS A GOAL, so I went with something higher than 33%
We'll have to see how long Doc Sadler lasts. Without having finished over .500 or in the top half of the conference in his first five years (soon to be six), I think there's quite a bit of disappointment with the program right now. He also was hired by an athletic director that was subsequently fired (although not for basketball reasons). I don't have any special insight into how long Sadler's leash is.
I've always thought that to win at Nebraska you have to go out and get a guy who is a knock out recruiter and hope he can find a way to coach the talent. I think with Doc, Nebraska went the route like Northwestern and hired the best X's and O's guy they could get and hope he could find a way to get enough talent to coach it to a win. Don't think in the long run it'll work but I still have a ton of respect for Sadler as a bball tactician.
What percentage of success for coaches is x's and o's and how much is Jims and Joes? Clearly UNC was worse with Doherty coaching the same kids, but I can't help but wonder if the Steve Fishers just roll the ball out there.